“people claiming to be advocates dressed up in black and white also act, like ‘paid hooligans’ to grab the properties with the connivance of land grabbers”
while commenting on the issue of advocates engaging in unlawful activities.
A writ petition was filed before the Madras High Court with regard to a land grabbing case. The petition alleged that a group of people that involved certain advocates had tried to forcibly take over a property that was locked. The police was not compliant with the petitioner’s demands of filing the case, hence they were forced to approach the Court. The petition was filed under Sections 419, 420, 467-468, 120B and 109 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) which are the offences of cheating, forgery, conspiracy and bribery. The accused was arrested under the Tamil Nadu Goondas Act. The anticipatory bail plea that was filed was also dismissed. The accused despite all the actions taken against him was able to mobilise a group that tried to forcibly take possession of the petitioner’s property.
The single-judge bench comprised of Justice N Anand Venkatesh when noting that
“This is the third occasion, in the last one month, where the notice of this Court has been drawn to the advocates indulging themselves in criminal activities by forming part of an unlawful assembly and making attempts to grab properties”
“When it comes to the conduct of the advocates, there will be zero tolerance shown by this Court and this Court has to ensure that the activities of some of the advocates do not spoil the image of the entire profession.”
The Court when emphasising that time of pandemic has been described as a period of revival of these activities quoted
“And once again some advocates are indulging in illegal activities of grabbing properties.”
By taking responsibility the Court said that “It is high time that this Court again comes down heavily and stop such activities before it goes out of control.”
Decision of Madras High Court
The Court referred the matter to the State Bar Council for taking action. The Court also ordered for protection for the property of the petitioner which was the subject matter. The Court also called for an analysis of all evidence, photographs, video material to identify those involved in these activities.
PS Kirubakaran v. The Commissioner of Police, Vepery and ors
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgement from the court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also contribute blog, articles, story tip, judgment and many more and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.